About your Search

20130420
20130420
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
's only possible on the -- look at the host of just raised the issue on tax bases. it's not a minor problem. if we have asked for a report and the outcome was -- companies which are -- on a global level, a tax burden which is high compared to companies not on a global level because the possibilities, the options to avoid taxation, are in this interconnected world, and at the end you need someone who pays for the budget. otherwise you will create major problems in europe. exist to discuss better market economy, is more successful combined with political freedom and democracy and rule of law, over the economy combined with the political system which is so complicated. i am convinced, more sustainable the basis of freedom, the rule of law, democracy, and might be a bit more complicated. more sustainable. perhaps we have to do this again and again. >> let me ask you quit a different question and that is, u.s. and the european union have announced they're going to negotiate a transatlantic investment and trade pact, partnership, and several have suggested that the united states and europ
sam but the ways in which they do this are very different. if you just apply a flat tax on u.s. imports that's one way to push our trade back into balance that doesn't involve risks of crony capitalism, that doesn't involve risks to the government micromanaging the economy. if you say okay which is going to have a flat tariff of 10% or 20% or 30% whatever it takes to get to a zero trade deficit that doesn't introduce a lot of corruption or a lot of dangers bad policymaking because it's a very simple policy. it's just determined by an arithmetical formula and there's no opportunity for anybody to play games. one of the good things about it if you have a flat tariff, is if you had a 30% tariff on imported goods that's not enough to relocate the production of t-shirts that united states because cost is too great. it's great to relocate things like silicon wafer fabrication so would tend to relocate back to the u.s. high value capital-intensive skill intensive industries which is of course what we want to do. those are the industries that are high-quality -- high-quality into she
electronically that i haven't been up front with my taxes. this would prevent d.h.s. from say sharing that information with guest: the private companies in sharing information, the biggest concern is -- individuals are concerned that their private information within the cyber networks orson dems would be held -- or systems would be held by private companies but then provided to the government , that this private information would not be stripped by the companies first. in the president's executive order, the onus would be on the privacy advocates. they want the private companies to strip any private information that might be caught up within the context of cyber threat information. thet one has to understand definition of cyber threat. it is unlikely but not impossible that your private tax information, your e-mail content would be part of that information that is a cyber threat information that would be given to the government. is there a possibility that it would be lumped in with that? yes. so whose responsibility is it to minimize and get rid of your private information? the bill
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)